About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
MSNBCW 7
CSPAN 4
CNNW 2
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 22
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)
the charges, miranda rights, the public safety exemption, where are we right now on that issue? >> well, the normal rule is that when someone's irsed, they're advised of their rights. you have the right to remain silent. anything you say can be used against you. you have the right to a lawyer. if you can't afford one it will be provided, that sort of thing. if police don't give that warning then they cannot use any statements of the defendant in court. the exception to that is called the public safety exception. it's been extended by judges to terrorism cases. and the idea is that if you need information quickly to preserve public safety, you can ask those questions and still use the responses in court. but that public safety exception rule is limited. it only applies for several hours after fill in the blank. we assume after questioning starts rather than after arrest. probably no more than a day, day and a half. >> where do you come up with that? pete, let me interrupt you there. who has come up with what is the time? is it just, you know it when you see it? >> in terms of the time li
't -- he shouldn't be mirandaized right away. i know you agree with them. >> i think the miranda issue is an easier issue. he doesn't have to be mar lindaized for a lot of reason. first of all, they have enough evidence to convict him without getting a confession from him. all miranda gets you is a confession you can use in court. you can use that information for everything else. remember, he confessed already to the guy they kidnapped. the guy he kidnapped says, these two guys told us, we did the bombing. they got great witness and they got a great confession. maybe even better than a law enforcement confession where you can claim it was forced out of you. they gave a upon takenious confession -- spontaneous confession. >> bob wants to get in here. so then why did they need to make that statement? i'm trying to figure out why they made that statement? >> i don't know exactly why they made it. maybe because they got so much criticism -- remember the christmas morning bomber that they mirandaized right away, lost the opportunity to get information from him? so i think maybe they were pl
can he be questioned before the public safety runs out, most say 48 hours. once under miranda he is under no obligation to cooperate with authorities. >> remember the number one goal right here is to get inside his head and get whatever intelligence he has with any operatives in the united states to protect the homeland and protect americans inside the united states. >> reporter: speaking this morning on fox news, former u.s. attorney general alberto gonzales suggested being mirandized will not necessarily close off the flow of information from tsnaraev. >> we have something we can give him which is his life. for example, taking the death penalty off the i believe at that. there is possible some kind of deal would be made where he provides information and in exchange for that the government gives him some kind of a plea agreement. >> reporter: gonzalez suspects what may be happening now is in the obama administration is a quote, interagency scrum where some are pushing for a quick mirandizing. others may be advocating a delay so as much information as possible can be garnered, ma
suspect is not, not entitled to his miranda rights. they want dzhokhar tsarnaev to be treated as an enemy combatant. and the transit police officer injured in a shootout with the suspects remains in critical condition. don't forget about this hero. officer richard donahue being treated for a single gunshot wound. meanwhile, authorities are still looking at another disaster further south, way further south, trying to get to the bottom of what caused that blast at the fertilizer plant in west, texas. fox'sdom nick is there with the -- dominic is there with 14 dead. >> 200 injured. we understand from the authorities that 14 bodies have been recovered. they do not expect that number to rise much, if at all. 13 critically ill in hospital. it's unclear now on day three after the disaster how many of those will pull through. they think most of them actually will. the bodies of those that have been recovered from the site here in west have been taken to dallas for forensics. those that were most closest to the epicenter of the site, difficult for them to identify. however, these are some of the f
be read his miranda rights. moving past the politics of it because it seems to get a little poe lit kal, as a former member of fbi how does whether or not the suspect is read his miranda rights influence or impact your investigation? >> it really becomes irrelevant. good report-based interviewers and interrogators who are the ones most effective. the fbi doesn't do that because we're nice. we do that because it worked. in reported based interviewers miranda they can read that and continue. it is not a major obstacle. it is almost irrelevant. jenna: really? we're hearing a it is a major issue whether we get to the bottom of this investigation. so what should we consider as we continue to hear the debate ongoing over the next several days? >> it doesn't, it really doesn't make that much difference to the interviewers and especially the particular group of profile he is -- profilers they developed at quantico, at the fbi academy. this is not terribly relevant. they can sit down with the people. they can interview them. they look for behavioral cues. they look for a way to establish a relat
today at his hospital bedside and read his miranda rights, that was an important moment in this test. because while there is more to this test than this moment, we did learn in this moment they are going to try this guy according to our laws and values, as a sloppy criminal he is alleged to be. joining me at the table the ferelli. it's great to have you both here. so i refer to unnamed troll, republican senators who were calling for enemy combatant to be applied to this 19-year-old suspect. i want to play a little bit of sound from senator lindsey graham who was probably the most outspoken about this. take a listen. >> i believe our nation is at war. the enemy is radical islam, defined as the taliban, al qaeda, and affiliated groups. the question i have regarding this case is there any association between these two individuals and the groups i just named to allow enemy combatant status to be conferred upon the suspect in boston. >> don, you and i were talking about this a lot last week as the investigation was unfolding. >> right. >> what is your reaction to that? >> i -- it seems to
not get his miranda rights. >> among of group of republicans calling for the boston bombing suspect to be considered an enemy combatant. that means he would not have the same constitutional protection as a regular citizen, with regard to what he says as the investigation moves forward. will this happen? california congressman, a senior member of the intelligence committee. congressman, always good to see you. i know that you disagree with the congressman and think that the suspect is in custody. is entitled to his miranda rights. why? >> well, i think the administration is handling it exactly correct. there is a public safety exception under the miranda allowing law enforcement to interview him, making sure there are no other bombs, threats, perpetrators still out there giving the law enforcement flexibility to do the that prior to miranda and i think the court will interpret it broadly and give them the time they need to make sure that the public is safe. after that, he will have to be mirandized, doesn't mean the end of cooperation, but no basis yet to conclude they should be trea
shouldn't be mirandaized right away. i know you agree with them. >> i think the miranda issue is an easier issue. he doesn't have to be mar lindaized for a lot of reason. first of all, they have enough evidence to convict him without getting a confession from him. all miranda gets you is a confession you can use in court. you can use that information for everything else. remember, he confessed already to the guy they kidnapped. the guy he kidnapped says, these two guys told us, we did the bombing. they got great witness and they got a great confession. maybe even better than a law enforcement confession where you can claim it was forced out of you. they gave a upon takenious confession -- spontaneous confession. >> bob wants to get in here. so then why did they need to make that statement? i'm trying to figure out why they made that statement? >> i don't know exactly why they made it. maybe because they got so much criticism -- remember the christmas morning bomber that they mirandaized right away, lost the opportunity to get information from him? so i think maybe they were playing defense
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
federal government has done the right thing. when ints that somehow suspects have right to counsel miranda warnings causes them to stop cooperating with law enforcement is not facts and studies. and ct, d.o.j. officials senior law enforcement officials 90% of the ou 80% to time in sophisticated cases when defense counsel get involved to help emhis more and icit more information allow the case to go forward. there have been multiple cases 9/11 that have been prosecuted, investigated and prosecuted by law enforcement resulted in more information available to law lawful tools ing without needing to violate rights. senator mentioned graham. he pushed against the decision the combatant status. [video clip] >> i hope the congress will at this case and look at our laws and come to the to.lusion that i have come we are at war. for a going to be at war very long time and we have to have the tools to defend values.es within our one of those tools is the ability to question people about future attacks to gather intelligence for national purposes without benefit of counsel. the information will neve
's before he gets the miranda rights. the fact that he can't speak right now, does that push back that window of time because they're not getting anything from him? >> that's a good question that i won't speculate on without a legal background. i'll leave that one up to the master pete williams. but i can imagine there's got to be some sort of gray area there that some lawyer could look at. on that point, though, i think it's interesting, where we've gone now from, alex, is we've gone from this, all right, what exactly happened, to these real sort of questions surrounding the national security of this country, and how exactly these two individuals were able to go forward with what they ultimately accomplished. so this morning, sort of around that point, talking to folks related to the house homeland security committee, they say they really want to sort of get this investigation rolling on why these two individuals seem to have slipped through the u.s. intelligence community, especially after that information reported yesterday that the russians were concerned about the older broth
with the questions out receiving miranda warnings but the only downside is that his statements may not be used against him at trial. this is not much of a risk when you consider the other available evidence including photo images of him at the scene of the bombings and his own reported confession to the victim whose car he helped hijack during the last week's terror in boston. . but if your concern is over the larger threat in who the tsarnaev brothers were and are, what they did and what they represent, then worry a lot. for starters, you you can worry about how the high-value intergage group or h.i.g., will do its work. that unit was finally put in place by the f.b.i. after so-called underwear bomber tried to blow up the airplane in which he was traveling as it flew over detroit on christmas day, 2009. and was advise of his mir and da rights. the c.i.a. interrogation program that might have handleled the interview had by then been dismantled by president obama. at the behest of such muslim brotherhood affiliated groups as the council on american islamic relations, and the islamic society of
-called public safety exception to the miranda rule where for some period of time, it's not entirely clear how long, a suspect can be questioned without miranda warnings and that apparently is what's happening here. again, it's complicated somewhat by the fact that we didn't know exactly what tsarnaev's medical condition is and how many questions he can answer. apparently he's answering some questions in writing. so i don't really see lindsey graham's proposal as all that differentwhat's going on now. he seems to suggest a longer process of questioning him, but the obama administration has also committed to some period of questioning. now, this all assumes that he's willing to answer questions. can he always samp simply say it answering questions and there is no way either under enemy combatant rules or in the criminal justice system to force someone to answer questions who doesn't want to answer them. >> the argument i guess is under this limited questioning period before he is formally advised of his miranda rights, he has and right to an attorney, doesn't have to answer any questions. there
with american citizens. it allows the justice department to delay reading a suspect his miranda rights if doing so is in the interest of -- quote -- "public safety." the administration had rightly invoked this public safety exception in the case of the boston suspect which provided our national security professionals a discreet period of time to gather intelligence from the suspect without the presence of his lawyer. however, soon after questioning him this way, the administration recently reversed itself and read the suspect his miranda rights. in doing so, the administration, in my view, gave up a valuable opportunity to lawfully and thoroughly question the suspect for purposes of gathering intelligence about potential future terrorist plots. whether we will be able to acquire such information has now been left entirely at the discretion of the suspect and his lawyer. put simply, the suspect has been told he has the right to remain silent, and if he doesn't want to provide intelligence, he doesn't have to. is this a responsible balance between a citizen's rights and our national security? the
. they didn't give a miranda warning so the aclu is shouting about that. and of course, well-known southern bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he so
-- they are culling out the quarrel decision that is almost a 30-year exception to the miranda rule. it has got nothing to do with anything, the idea of charging dzhokhar as an enemy combatant that essentially shifts it to guantanamo, is so inconsistent it is [ inaudible ] to me. >> bill: the exception to miranda that you can get that information because of a national security issue, you can question him without reading him his miranda rights first. i have no problem with that at all. >> i agree with you. >> bill: but what is wrong with trying anymore our federal courts? haven't we had success trying terrorist cases in our federal courts? >> hundreds of successful cases, instead of the tribunal where they have had less than a handful with not near the success of our federal courts especially in boston. you have a great united states attorney up there, they have plenty of experience in dealing with people like this. the idea of calling him an enemy combatant and shipping him to a gun on the mow, is an outrage. .he is communicating. the hig guys have already been in there, t
. anytime we question him about his guilt or innocence, he is entitled to his miranda rights and a lawyer. to gathere the right intelligence from enemy combatants and a citizen can be an enemy combatant. host: the question we want to hear from you on its should the ballston bomber designated as an enemy combatant? screen.ers are on your chuck want to play inyou schumer, a democrat, responding to lindsey graham yesterday. [video clip] >> i think the good news is we don't need enemy combatants to get all the information we need out of him. the court that has ruled has allowed a lot of flexibility in the public safety exception before you mirandize someone. anytime there's a high value interrogation group, composed of the fbi, cia, and anyone else can question him without a lawyer in a secure situation and find out whatever they need, that can be used against him in a trial, but there's plenty of evidence. they don't need his confession. so i don't think we have to cross the line and say he should be an enemy combatant, which could be challenged in court. getting comments on our facebook pag
miranda rights and a lawyer. but we have the right under our law -- i've been a military lawyer for 30 years, to gather intelligence from enemy combatants. and a citizen can be an enemy combatant. he is not eligible for military commission trial. i wrote the military commission in 2009. he cannot go to military commission. >> so a civil trial no matter what. right. >> in my view a civil trial, it should be a federal trial. >> right. and senator schumer, i know you agree this should go to a federal court. i want to quick read you something that one of your colleagues said. this is from senator carl levin, the chairman of the armed services committee. and in response to senator graham and others saying this man needs to be treated as a terrorist, this is what senator levin said. i am not aware of any evidence so far that the boston suspect is part of any organized group let alone al qaeda, the taliban or within of their affiliates. to hold the suspect as an enemy combatant under these circumstances would be contrary to our laws and may even jeopardize our efforts to prosecute him for his
now has closed that limited scope that they were able to focus on before reading him his miranda rights? >> not necessarily. that could go independently. i guess now that they've had this initial appearance, i suppose that's a fair assumption. it isn't automatic but that's probably right. >> what about michael isikoff, our colleague is reporting that i.c.e. homeland security has focused on new bedford, massachusetts and two individuals were taken in for immigration violations and they apparently are friends of tamerlan tsarnaev. can you tell me any more about that? >> these are people, i presume he is talking about people detained in new bedford, massachusetts on friday evening. the fbi has been trying to investigate whether they had any knowledge of this. whether they had any role in it. they seem to have concluded that they don't. but they're being held for now on immigration charges pending further investigation. >> and before i let you go, i know you have more to cover. 2009, this police report of tamerlan tsarnaev being arrested on domestic violence allegations. that has bee
want the boston bombing suspect treated as an enemy combatants, sparking miranda debate. key republicans are calling on the obama administration to declare the 19-year-old suspect an enemy combatant subject to the loss of four, so intelligence officials can continue to interrogate him for as long as they deem necessary. authorities captured him in watertown, mass. friday evening. they are invoking the public .afety exception he remains hospitalized under sedation and remains unclear what kind of communication they are able to have him at the moment. judy is on the phone from north carolina, independent line. good morning, and welcome to the program. caller: thank you. my thought on the issue is that we are a large nation, an all- inclusive nation, and i believe that the boy scouts is a private organization and has the right to determine who their membership is. i believe there should be a third organization that some of the gay-rights people should put into place, and that would be the rainbow scouts. then they can put all the lbb tea in anything they wanted, -- lgbt. republi
Search Results 0 to 21 of about 22 (some duplicates have been removed)